“Do you see a man who speaks in haste? There is more hope for a fool than for him.” The same can be said for Imran Khan and Dr Tahirul Qadri. While it is true that many leaders and historical figures are upheld as examples, these two are by no means positive and have come in for criticism, generally of a severe and diplomatic variety. The majority of leaders follow a very tight structure, a simple formula that allows for a neatness and clarity of thought within the limited time allowed. But both these speakers tend to open with reference to news items that act as the topic tag for their overall reflections. This opener needs to grab the listeners’ attention, irrespective of the responsibility or relevance of what they have said; this sentence, therefore, tends to be very specific, often introduced in the context of the speaker’s, or alternatively the media’s, breaking news reaction to the piece of news. A second method used by Imran Khan and Dr Tahirul Qadri is to use the topic tag as a jumping point for a more general discussion. Listening to Dr Tahirul Qadri the religious bit initiates a change of tone in which Dr Qadri moves from one particular current example to a wider reflection with a religious angle. In this case, the speech provides the initial theme but the thrust of the reflection is not a direct suggestion of how to resolve the current political situation but a more abstract meditation on the theological and political issues exploiting naïve audiences tied to the complex of guilt and religious sentiments. While this type of thought can work, it can also risk at times sounding like it is using a contemporary issue simply as an analogy or attention grabbing device, much like a joke at the start of a sermon. The transition technique used by Imran Khan and Dr Qadri initiates a move away from responsibility, not offering a response to current affairs, but rather simply using current affairs as an excuse to explore a particular aspect of personal indifference. The near ubiquity of religious references notwithstanding, a substantial proportion of the speeches seem merely to pay lip service to real political reasoning. Frequently, scriptural phrases and theological quotations, threats and allegations are used to sanctify what otherwise demonstrates very little difference from other comment pieces. Sadly, opinions surrounding the issues seem at times to polarise into a war of personal ego. The use of emotionally charged rhetoric from Imran, such as demands that the prime minister step down in order for an independent investigation of alleged election rigging, bear witness to what can be described as a surprisingly widespread sense of victimhood. It can be said that, although it might be a tactical coup for Nawaz Sharif to resign from his post, it does not amount to a strategic win. Imran’s use of aggressive language is symptomatic of the manner in which this debate is often set, as a struggle between two opposing factions — the righteous and the sinful — with the concern being to maximise his live presence in those periodic 10 to 20 minutes every evening on air. In such a context, those who speak the loudest on all sides often fail to pause and consider what kind of political speech they are actually seeking to safeguard or dismantle. Imran should attempt not just to offer another promise amongst his babbled threats but to begin by listening attentively to others who are sensible, mature and responsible. It is to be hoped that, by first remaining quiet and listening, he will better be able to respond to the issues raised by the protest. There is no space for aggression in politics. After all, our own fallibility is fundamental to the political standing of our place in the world, and therefore it is crucial that our thoughts are offered with humility and a due sense of their own responsibility and space. All our words are held under both judgment and grace and must therefore be chosen with care and preceded by the due silence of contemplation. When Imran Khan and Dr Qadri stray into more political territory, they tend to direct their attentions to praising and affirming the democratic system itself, rather than placing themselves at any specific point on the political spectrum. In their speeches where politically sensitive areas are touched upon, the language is not carefully hedged. Imran Khan has tended very broadly to be critical in his presentations; advocating a reformed electoral commission, attacking corruption, brutally opposing Nawaz Sharif and his policies and demanding resignations amidst a host of unproven allegations. All at the behest of his perception that the “umpire would raise his finger and strike the premier out”. What Imran is, however, conveniently forgetting is that some doubtful decisions are also referred to the third umpire. Afghanistan is looking at the prospect of a constitutional power vacuum and negotiations over the unity government have failed to break the deadlock over the successor to Hamid Karzai, who plans to leave office next week. A US brokered deal in which both candidates agreed to accept the audit and for the winner to then form a national unity government has been a headache and is not going to finish by early September 2014. With lingering political crises in the region, Washington is clearly interested in resolving the present conflict in Pakistan and the smooth continuation of democracy, possibly without any midterm elections in the near future. Both Imran and Dr Qadri heaved a sigh of relief when Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif eventually agreed to mediate and become the guarantor. However, given this irresolute model of constant denial and hostile communication, the army can only ever be partial, and in all the conflicting truth and desperation surrounding politicians their haste is once again providing the prologue to the death of democracy. Politicians and religious leaders, especially their advisors, should be careful about the importance of this time and the message. The writer is a professor of Psychiatry and consultant Forensic Psychiatrist in the UK. He can be contacted at fawad_shifa@yahoo.com